'A number of fatalities' confirmed as huge blaze 'sparked by a faulty FRIDGE' engulfs 27-storey buil

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Any word yet on the number of people unaccounted for?

I know they have said 6 dead but how many are unaccounted.

Not sure - reports are a bit sketchy.
It sounds as though more casualties are likely and a lot of people are suffering from smoke inhalation.
The cause is not yet known - though the mail headlined with 'faulty fridge'

The faulty fridge/fridge freezer is a direct quote from an inhabitant, but it's anecdotal as it's what that inhabitant had heard from someone else, not yet proven, but given the fact that new kitchens (and therefore presumably electricals) had recently been fitted in many of the flats it doesn't sound that unlikely as the potential cause - we all saw what was happening with some tumble dryers over the last few years.

a reply to: Flavian

Okaaaayyyyyy...I'm sure you are correct, I don't know the codes in the UK. I can tell you though, the use of such a material in the US would be HIGHLY illegal! (like 'go to jail' kind of illegal). Then again, life safety system violations would result in "red-tagging" of a building where residents were barred from entering the premises until the violations had been corrected...to prevent exactly what happened here (i.e. people being trapped in a raging inferno).

Have incidents like this happened in the US too? Yes, absolutely they have (a couple nightclub fires come to mind), and people went to prison too as a result. However, (and not making excuses here) most of these events occurred as a result of a violation being performed in between inspection cycles and the event occurring before the next inspection as well. It sounds as if the life safety violations have been going on in this building for years and have not been addressed, but people were still allowed inside.

All further to the point about politicians and government authorities being unable to solve simple problems, yet the people have faith they are capable of solving considerably more complex problems like terrorism.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I do agree and the management company seem to be up to their necks in this. However, it really is too early to say definitively - you know better than most on here how media can run with a story without any actual fact checking first.

I have just been checking out the Corporate Manslaughter Act (2011) - there don't seem to be custodial sentences available? Massive fines, etc, but no jail time? That can't be right.......

a reply to: Macenroe82

What rattled me even more is how the news felt it was important to state that this building was home to a majority of muslim's.
How in the hell does that have ANY bearing on the fact that the building is on fire and the tenants are trapped inside?

Although I totally agree with the sentiment of your post, I've not heard any news reports in the UK stating the faith of those in the building. For one thing, they wouldn't know, for another there's no relevance as you say. I guess that may be an American channel you saw it on making a huge assumption for what ever reason it thought (wrongly) was of importance?

a reply to: Flavian

That Act concerns Corporations and not individuals. Hence why no jail time.

Frankly, it doesn't really matter if the root cause of this tragic incident was a refrigerator catching on fire...or an intentional fire bombing, the facts remain:

1. Nobody should have been allowed inside the building until all outstanding life safety violations were corrected, and...

2. No building, zero, should be allowed to be clad in flammable cladding. Ever!

Creating a death trap is criminal. Failing to address the problems which cause a death trap is criminal. But allowing a death trap to exist for years, and not taking measures to prevent the public from entering, takes the cake!

I should clarify that individuals can be held liable and sentenced under other legislation, Health and Safety breaches and the like.

a reply to: uncommitted

For sure it was an american channel. ( Im in canada)

I even said out loud to the tv - WHY THE F does that matter!

originally posted by: Flavian
a reply to: TrueBrit

I do agree and the management company seem to be up to their necks in this. However, it really is too early to say definitively - you know better than most on here how media can run with a story without any actual fact checking first.

I have just been checking out the Corporate Manslaughter Act (2011) - there don't seem to be custodial sentences available? Massive fines, etc, but no jail time? That can't be right.......

The various parties involved include:

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea - own the premises
en.wikipedia.org...

KCTMO (Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation) - manage the premises
www.kctmo.org.uk...

Rydon (Main contractor for the refurbishment)
www.rydon.co.uk...

Harley Facades Ltd - sub contractor that installed the plastic/aluminium coat
www.harleyfacades.co.uk... (Harley have taken down the relevant page)

BREAM - Professional body that carries out building research and assesses buildings under relevant criteria www.breeam.com... (the actual assessor/s possibly at risk of prosecution due to possibly not noting if materials used complied with current H&S standards)

London Fire Service -
www.london-fire.gov.uk... - (as far as I am aware, only presented recommendations and did not serve Notice on either the council or TMO)

Central Govt - for making too many cuts to civic and welfare services, including the police. One of the police services that was cut first was Secure by Design, meaning no more designated officer to consult at planning stage.

Whilst there are so many corporate entities involved, I think this is a contractor issue.

The UK has has the strongest H&S rules in the world so I cannot imagine designs that included the non-fire safe product would have been approved. But where profit is god, contractors often 'cut corners' and I think the lesser product was used.

a reply to: oldcarpy

Well, starting at the top, which is always the correct approach to these things, you have the former housing minister, Gavin Barwell, who is the freshly minted Chief of Staff for Theresa May. He is the one who had been sitting on the report in the first place, the one mentioned throughout this thread, and which contained the list of concerns and recommendations to which we have been alluding.

This personage, as housing minister, was approached by a member of an all party group who had been trying to get a review started on the matter of the 4,000 or so tower blocks in this country, many of which have no internal fire suppression systems of any kind, as well as many other basic failures in their construction, with regard to fire safety. Upon being approached by the all party group member, the then housing minister explained that he was "Still considering the proposal" (that is, still considering whether or not to accept the recommendations of the all party groups action plan, and actually begin a review into fire safety, a review which had been on the cards for ELEVEN YEARS, and for some reason had never been undertaken in all that time). Now, Mr Barwell was only housing minister for one year, that is true. But given that he was not only the Minister for Housing, but sat on a report which looked unfavourably on the state of Britains high rise residential blocks, that begs two very important questions.

Why did he do that, given that his job title demanded he do something entirely opposite to that, in response to the contents of the report issued by the all party group?

Why did his predecessors over the last eleven years also do nothing about the review process, which demonstrably was an urgent matter, and in need of swift action to complete, not to mention enact remedial works to comply with any recommendations that review process might have bought up?

And finally, why is it that the Conservatives voted against new and better law pertaining to the standards of safety and livability that landlords are expected to comply with?

Once again, this government have been directly involved with a serious failure of communication, which has led to deaths. Whether you think about national security, the health service, or basic principles of fire safety, the most rudimentary thing you can ask a government to legislate on and act on appropriately, the Conservatives have roundly failed in every particular to uphold, defend and serve the man in the street, and it has become utterly tiresome.

All to protect money ... all the outrage in the world means nothing when the owner gets a fine

Im shure the owner will write the dead bodies and lawsuits as buisness expenxes ...

Ill bet u anything if the punishment for this was to be draged in the street and put down like a dog people lives would no longer look like $$$

a reply to: TrueBrit

OK. Landlords actually have to comply with pretty high standards and the law is generally biased in favour of tenants rather than landlords.

What legislation did the Conservatives vote against and when?

a reply to: oldcarpy

That is not technically true, or even slightly the case in practice, regardless of what the paperwork says.

And regarding the vote I am talking about...


www.independent.co.uk...

You might not like the source, but regardless of your appreciation for their work (I have none, so I feel you there, truly) the information within this article is not a point for debate, it is simply what happened.

Further to that, regarding your assertion that the rules favour the tenant, I hate to break it to you, but that is something you would only even JOKE about, if you were actually a landlord, not a tenant. The reality is that at present, the law on these matters has far too many loopholes, loopholes through which slums and dangerous property get past the environmental health people, can sail past inspections, and there is also no route for someone to complain about collusion between a local housing inspector, and the landlord of a property, which is a problem for some residents in my area particularly.

There are people around my way who have mushrooms growing in their bathroom, because the landlord refuses to fix leaks in the fabric of the building. There are people within three blocks of here who have such aggressive mold problems, that they have been forced out of the building, and this despite every possible treatment, tincture, trick and method to remove and prevent mold. There are tenants around these parts who have substandard security equipment, badly fitted doors and windows, doors which are falling to pieces, windows which fail to shut, electrics which fail on the daily, and are not correctly protected against surges, gas fitting which is condemnable due to its propensity to let by dangerous amounts of gas or fumes, improper plumbing besides that...

Thats all within six blocks of where I am at the moment. Landlords around here get away with all sorts of shady crap, despite its being illegal, and they nearly never get forced to do anything about the state of their property, unless it threatens other surrounding property, owned by others, to leave it in poor repair.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

God damn, that's like a scene from a movie!

And sorry guys, but that advice about "staying in your flat" is just spectacularly stupid.

So the building hasn't collapsed?

Are they seriously saying the fridge "exploded" ? How can something like that even happen, outside of a cartoon?

The "23 hours ago" time stamp is probably just a glitch, due to the fire starting around midnight. It's not like 9/11, where they were reporting the collapse of WTC7, and you could see that tower still standing in the background.

originally posted by: szino9

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: D8Tee

Stay in your home???? seriously? That's the very last thing I'd be doing I'm afraid, I'd be down those stairs in Olympic time

Stay in your flat policy is pretty common in London. All flats have their individual battery powered smoke detector that is not connected to the main fire panel. Now I dont know this building so just from my experience, the main panel usually located on the ground floor and supposed to be connected to the fire department. Problem is its only 'see' the common areas where smoke detectors are connected to it. E.G bin - rooms, ground floor corridors etc. In case of a fire in the common areas, fire doors in the building should automatically close and resist fire to spread for an hour or so.

I am at a complete loss how this fire spread so fast, although D8Tee member explained they had a new cover of the building.

Everywhere that I know has an evacuation drill whenever the fire alarm goes off. Offices, campus dorms, apartments.
My apartment block in Norway had sprinklers in every room as well as a centralised fire alarm system. Even the kitchen sink had a fire hose on a wheel in the cupboards underneath. It was a requirement of new tenants to be able to haul the fire hose up to the mezzanine level by the open plan staircase.

With this tower block, the council used a private-public partnership to manage the apartments. They spent money on making the outside of the building looking pretty using the cheapest materials (ie. flammable), since fireproof materials are usually more expensive. Neither the fire alarms nor the sprinkler systems were working.

www.kctmo.org.uk...
www.kctmo.org.uk...
www.kctmo.org.uk...

It's the fire brigade who had the "stay put" policy.

"During the regeneration of the building we have come across alterations that have made properties
unsafe because they did not meet the building regulations."

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Are they seriously saying the fridge "exploded" ? How can something like that even happen, outside of a cartoon?

The "23 hours ago" time stamp is probably just a glitch, due to the fire starting around midnight. It's not like 9/11, where they were reporting the collapse of WTC7, and you could see that tower still standing in the background.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

London fire brigade had had to deal with one fire a week involving faulty fridges and freezers, around 270 incidents, with 70 injured and 7 killed.

a reply to: stormcell

OK. I honestly can't say that I've ever heard of a refrigerator starting a fire. I'm sure it happens, but around here having your fridge catch on fire sits somewhere around "being hit by a meteor" on the list of things you worry about.

a reply to: Chickensalad

No, that only happens while in New York City. Jet fuel has to be involved too.